SPEECH 



OF 



S.A.SMITH, OF TENNESSEE, 



IN DEFENSE OF THE ADMINISTRATION IN THE ORGANIZATION 

OF THE HOUSE. 



DELIVERED 



IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JANUARY 9, 1S56. 






WASHINGTON: 
PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE, 

1856. 






. 



SPEECH 



Mr. SMITH said: Mr. Clerk, I rise for the 
purpose of making a personal explanation, and, 
na this motion for a call of the House is evidently 
for the purpose of allowing members time to come 
in, this is the best time to make it. If the House, 
therefore, will indulge me at this time, I promise 
to be as brief as possible. [Cries of "Go on !" 
" Consent !"] A few days ago, it will be remem- 
bered — or, if it is not remembered, it is upon the 
record — I voted against laying upon the table a 
resolution introduced by the honorable gentle- 
man from Alabama, [Mr. Walker,] nominating 
for Speaker my friend from South Carolina, [Mr. 
Botce.] In doing so, I, to some extent, separated 
myself in that particular from a large majority of 
the Democratic party in this House. Some cen- 
sure was, for the moment, cast upon me for that 
act, though I believe no Democrat who voted 
against layin .lution on the table was 

suspected even of an intention to waver from his 
support of the regular nominee of the Democratic 
party. 

Nov/, sir, the reason why I gave that vote I 
want to furnish; and I want to do it for this pur- 
pose: there has been a shrewd, ingenious, but 
deliberate attempt made to cast the responsibility 
of the non-organization of this House upon the 
Democratic party and upon tl 1 ■ ration — 

upon the President. When tha gentleman from 
Alabama [Mr. Walker] first made the remark 
which he did here, in relation to the responsibil- 
ity of the want of organization of this body, the 
Democratic party had said nothing upon the sub- 
ject. They had attempted to throw the respon- 
sibility upon no one of the contending parties 
in the House. They were willing — and they did 



it — to sit here and vole, and to stand by their 
platform, and to stand by their candidate, the 
gentleman from Illinois, [Mr. Richardson.] We 
had struggled here for sometime; and though no 
result had been accomplished, each party had 
succeeded to some extent in defining its own po- 
sition; But, sir, to my astonishment and regret, 
I find that a party here, agreeing with us in senti- 
ment, as tfrty say, in relation to the great question 
that now agitates and divides the country, instead 
of making war upon the Black Republicans, as 
they are called, attempt most ingeniously to cast 
the odium upon the Democratic party for the 
failure that has occurred to organize the House 
And that attempt having been promoted by two 
of my colleagues from Tennessee — the honorable 
gentleman [Mr. Zollic offer] who represents 
the Nashville district, for whom I have the high- 
est respect, and my honorable colleague, [Mr. 
Etiieridce,] who proposed Mr. Millson the 
other day — I say that the attempt to throw this 
odium upon the Democrats having been promoted 
by these two gentlemen, I desire to show the per- 
fect and utter fallacy of any such charge against 
the Idministration or the Democratic party. 

Mr. Clerk, if there is a Democrat in this House 
who does not most earnestly desire an organiza- 
tion, I know not who he is. I should, however, 
not say a. word upon this point in relation to the 
Administration, but for a charge that has been 
organ of that once very re- 
spi ctable but now defunct organization, known 
as the Whig party — that the Administration is 
responsible for our want of organization. But, 
sir, as that charge has been made from so respect- 
able a source, and as it has become a prominent 



charge against the Administration, I take this 
occasion to. say, that, though I am not authorized 
to speak for the President nor for the Administra- 
tion, I speak what I knoio when I say that there 
is no member of this body who more earnestly 
desires the speech/ organization of the House than 
the President of the United States. I speak what 
I know when I make this statement, though I am 
authorized to speak for no one but myself; but, 
sir, I am anxious to see the House organize; and 
why the attempt should be made by this Know 
Nothing party, as it is called, to throw upon us 
the responsibility of the failure thus far, I cannot 



subject. The Know Nothings nearly rode me 
down in my district; and how did they do it ? 
They did it on the eighth section of the Philadel- 
phia American platform. It was proclaimed in 
every district of Tennessee that the proscription 
of Catholics for their religious tenets, which, they 
alleged, were inconsistent with their true allegiance 
to this Government, was the great and moving 
principle of the Know Nothing party. The con- 
ference of the ministers of the church whose 
principles I profess, but to which I do not belong, 
(I belong to none,) met in my county, and the 
influence of those men was almost irresistible in 



favor of the principle of the eighth section of the 
Sir, strange things have occurred here, which jj Philadelphia platform, and against the constitu 



ought to go to the country. Here are two partus 
opposed to the Democratic party of the House. 
Of course I do not refer to every individual in 
those parties; but I say that those who are called 
Black Republicans in this House owe their elec- 
tion here to Know Nbthingism. 

Mr. TRAFTON. I should like to ask the 
gentleman from Tennessee what he means by 
that expression? 

Mr. SMITH. Ey what expression? 
Mr. TRAFTON. Black Republicans. 
Mr. SMITH. I mean those gentlemen who 
have been voting for Mr. Banks; they have been 
called Black Republicans. I use tl 
courtesy. 

Mr. TRAFTON. Who calls them Black Re- 
publicans? That is the question. 

Mr. SMITH. I use the expression in all cour- 
tesy. The reason why they are called so, I sup- 
pose, is, because they want to put the negro upon 
an equality with the white man. 

Mr. HOUSTON. Above— they would put 
them above naturalized foreigners. 
Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir. 

Mr. NICHOLS. I do not understand the 
party to which the gentleman from Tennessee 
alludes to occupy any such position as lie gives 
for them. I am not in favor of putting the blacks 
upon an equality with the whites, and I am not 
aware that any such position is occupied by the 
party with which I am acting. 

Mr. SMITH. I do not believe that the gen- 
tleman from Ohio would be willing to do Chat. I 
am pursuing a line of argument, and not casting 
reflections on anybody. I give the common 
acceptation of the terms of the various parties in 
this House. I say, sir, that the large majority of 
the Black Republicans owe their election mainly 
to the secret organization to which some gentle- 
men from the South in main owe theirs. But what 
do we sec now? I speak from experience on the 



tional ideas of the Democratic party on the sub- 
ject of religious toleration. If they had not done 
so, I should never have had the least difficulty in 
reference to my election. But such was the 
fanaticism in my country on the subject of re- 
ligion,— not on the question of the exclusion of 
foreigners,— that, with a thousand majority of my 
political friends, it was with the greatest difficulty 
I was enabled to carry the district. 

What, Mr. Clerk, did we see here day before 
yesterday ? We saw the gentleman from Louisi- 
ana [Mr. Eustis] rise in his place and assert 
that the doctrine contained in the eighth section 
term in all [| of the Philadelphia Know Nothing platform was 
a monstrous doctrine. 

The CLERK. The time allotted the gentleman 
under the order of the House has expired. 

Mr. SMITH. I am speaking by unanimous 
consent. 

The CLERK. If there is no objection, the 
gentleman will proceed with his reirrarks. 
There was no objection. 

Mr. SMITH. I am obliged to the House. In 
order that I may not be misunderstood, I will 
read what the honorable gentleman from Louisi- 
ana [Mr. Eustis] did say on the subject of the 
religious test. In the Globe I find him using this 
language: 

•• What was the construction which the American can- 
didate t'er Governoi of that State placed upon the eighth 
article of the Philadelphia platform? We all know that, in 
the early part of his canvass, that candidate published a 
li ii, i hi which lie said be ni ver would vote for a Catholic. 
Thank God, that gentleman was defeated, and, sir, he ought 
in have been defeated. There was enough in that letter to 
defeat ten thousand candidates for Governor; and I trust 
thai e\ r\ man who holds such odious and monstrous doc- 
trines will ever meet wi'.li as deep a political grave as the 
honorable gentleman, the American candidate for Governor 
of Virginia, has met with." 

I was astonished to hear that doctrine from one 
who was of the secret organization which so 
bitterly denounced the religious opinions of the 
Catholics in my own district. Here a member of 



the American party holds doctrines diametrically 
opposite to those of that party, published and 
advocated in the gubernatorial and congressional 
canvass of Tennessee. But my astonishment 
was increased when I found these dissimilar 
doctrines wore indorsed by the honorable gentle- 
man from Alabama, [Mr. Walker,] who is an 
acknowledged leader of the Know Nothing or 
American party. What do we sec? These gen- 
tlemen hold, that if the eighth section of the 
Philadelphia American platform means anything, 
it declares a principle which is not only subvers- 
ive of the Constitution of the United States, but 
is, in the language of the gentleman from Louis- 
iana, [Mr. EnsTis,] monstrous. And yet, what 
did we hear in the next breath ? The Democrats 
met here on the Saturday night before the com- 
mencement of Congress, and passed a resolution 
in which they said, in most respectful terms, that 
they congratulated the country on the triumph 
of the Democratic party, in many of the States, 
on the principle of civil and religious liberty, 
which was so fiercely assaulted by the Know 
Nothing or American party. Two gentlemen 
rise in their places, and tell the House that the 
doctrine embodied in the eighth section of the 
Know Nothing platform is subversive of the 
Constitution, and that it is monstrous ! And yet 
they say they cannot unite with us, because we 
have congratulated the country on our triumph 
over that very eighth section. That is the effect 
of it. We have it disclosed, and authoritatively, 
too, that the principle against which we fought, 
and in the success of which triumph we congrat- 
ulated the country, is not only subversive of the 
Constitution, but is a monstrous principle ! 

I want this matter to properly go before the 
country. I do not want to be placed in a false 
position. I must use what feeble means I have 
to repel the ingenious assaults which are to be, 
and now are, made against the Democratic party. 
The Black Republicans, as they are called, make 
war on the Constitution, in reference to slavery. 
The Know Nothing or American party make 
war on the Constitution, in regard to religious 
toleration. That the latter, in their national 
council, made war on civil and religious liberty, 
is admitted by two gentlemen of the same party — 
one from Louisiana and thef ther from Alabama. 
I will say here, what I have often said at home, 
that the violation of either the provision of the 
Constitution in reference to religious toleration, 
or that in regard to slavery, is equally vital. 1 
will vote for a Elack Republican as soon as i 
woyld for any man who did not in tolo repudiate 
the odious eighth section of the Philadelphia 



platform. I never fail to express an opinion 
which I may honestly entertain. This opinion 
is one that ought to be expressed, and clearly 
and forcibly expressed. These two parties, I 
repeat, are alike objectionable, so long as they 
retain in their creeds these anti-constitutional 
i doctrines. If the southern Americans abandon 
the i ighth section of their national platform, and 
their other objectionable doctrines, then I meet 
them as political friends; for it is equally as im- 
portant for us to maintain that provision of the 
Constitution relating to religious toleration as the 
one relating to slavery. Sir, I voted against lay- 
ing that resolution on the table, for the purpose 
of giving those gentlemen a fair chance. I did 
not do it to get any advantage of them; for, sir, 
I seek no advantage of any man, and more par- 
ticularly would I seek no advantage from that 
party which is so fast fading from existence as 
the late Know Nothing party. I did it in good 
faith, in order to give them a chance to show 
their hand, and to remove the difficulties which 
exist here. But, to the astonishment of this side ■ 
of the House, enough of them voted against the 
resolution to prevent its passage; and therefore 
a large number of our friends changed their votes. 
I cb^l not change mine, because I never change a 
vote that has been given with an understanding 
of all the facts of the case. I never have done 
it, and I never expect to do it. I have changed 
many votes, when I did not understand the ques- 
tion, but that is the only reason which, in my 
opinion, would justify me in changing my votes. 
Now, sir, the intent of the American party, as 
indicated by the gentlemen who have' spoken in 
this debate, is to cast the odium of our non-or- 
ganization upon the Democratic party and upon 
the Administration. As I said before, I know 
that the President of the United States desires 
an organization, — not that he would interfere at 
all, by any means, — but as the Executive of this 
nation he desires to see the Government go on in 
tin' regular way, and to let the popular will ha? ! 
free expression through its only legitimate channel. 
That is his desire, I apprehend, without even a 
thought as to who shall preside over this body. 
This is an inquiry he has no right to make, ex- 
cepl in a spirit of solicitude for the interest of the 
country. I say here, now, to this House, that 1 
believe there ought to be a speedy organization, 
more particularly in view of the critical state of 
our foreign relations as disclosed in tie President's 
message, which we have really, though not offi- 
cially, read. While I believe that, I as firmly be- 
lieve that the only party which can save the coun- 
try is the Democratic party, and I believe that it 



6 



is important to preserve it in its unity and its 
strength. That was exhibited at the incoming of 
the present Administration. I desire to say a 
word or two upon that subject, and I shall then 
have done. 

Those gentlemen who are attempting here to 
cast odium upon, the present Administration are 
placing themselves in an unenviable attitude be- 
fore the country, if not now, at least they will be 
so placed in days to come. "When this Admin- 
istration came into power, it found the Govern- 
ment, to use a common expression, lying " loose 
all abjout." It found every Department of it 
disorganized or unorganized. It found thirty six 
secret inspectors of the customs stalking the streets 
of Washington upon a salary of $100,000 in the 
aggregate, without anything to do; it struck them 
off the list, and reorganized every branch of the 
Government and of the public service. Now, sir, 
you may come on with your committees — I care 
not who appoints them, even if he be the worst 
enemy of the Administration — and let them go 
into their investigations. Those investigations 
will only show what I have stated, that the Demo- 
cratic party is the only party that has ever shown 
capacity to administer properly the affairs of this 
Government. I only wish the Opposition \^uld 
examine the conduct and business of the various 
Departments of this Government. 

I, sir, have never asked anything at the hands 
of this Administration. I have never had any- 
thing. I do not want anything. But when I see 
an Administration assailed in this indirect way, 
which has been true to the country, true to the 
Constitution, and true to the principles and opin- 
ions of the very gentlemen who assail it upon the 
great question of the day, I feel that silence would 
do injustice not only to the Administration, but 
to the country. While upon this subject I may 
Say, that, when we ask these gentlemen what 
objection they have to the Administration, or to 
the President, they universally refer to some 
appointment to office. I want to express this 
opinion here, sir, that I think it unbecoming in a | 
southern man to stickle about the appointment 
of any officer of this Government. Why, sir, I 
am willing that you shall have all the offices. 
The North may have them all if she wants them. 
Give us our constitutional rights, and that is all 
that we ask of you. I, for one, stand here to say 
that the President may reject every man for whose 
appointment I ask, and I will never complain of 
him so long as lie sustains those constitutional 
rights which I believe to be dear to the people 
of my section, and absolutely necessary to the 
perpetuity of this Union. That is all I ask of I 



the Administration; and I submit that it is not in 
keeping with the dignity, the character, and the 
chivalry, if I may so speak, of southern men, to 
stickle about the appointment of officers by a man 
who, amidst all the prejudices of his own section, 
stands by the peculiar institution of the South, 
as guarantied by the Constitution. When I am 
told that the President of the United States has 
expressed his opposition to slavery, I say that he 
is only entitled to the more credit for the support 
of the guarantees of the Constitution that protect 
us in the enjoyment of that institution. The man 
who owns a thousand or ten slaves is entitled to 
no credit for the support of the institution. It is 
his interest to do it. But the man who has been 
raised at the North, in the midst of all the preju- 
dices which have been excited there by dema- 
gogues and politicians against this institution, 
and yet has the boldness, the courage, and the 
patriotism, to stand by the guarantees of the 
Constitution for the protection of our rights and 
our institutions, is entitled to high credit, and a 
warm support from those who desire a perpetuity 
of the Union. I have but little patience with 
southern men who cavil about offices when such 
great principles as these are at stake. 

The position which the President has»taken 
since his election, and in his late message, has 
been the position that he has uniformly taken 
during the course of a long public life— in the 
Legislature of New Hampshire, in the two 
branches of Congress, and in the executive chair; 
and I challenge the proof of any inconsistency ou 
his part in relation to this question. And yet 
we see southern gentlemen here assailing him 
most furiously for what they call his Abolition 
tendencies. I feel, sir, that there is an error in 
the minds of a portion of the people of the South 
who belong to the American party in relation to 
this, and I wish it to be corrected. I do not mean 
to impute improper motives to any of those gen- 
tlemen, but it is due to the history of the country 
that this tiling shall go no further. I am willing 
to meet all men who make war upon no provision 
of the Constitution, as I understand it; and upon 
the subject of this Catholic test, upon equal terms, 
personally or politically, I beg leave simply to 
state what I said in a few words during the last 
Congress on this Catholic question, as I was one 
of the first to discuss this subject in the Housa 
of Representatives. I said it then, I say it now, 
and I intend always to say it: 

" I do not come as the advocate of the Catholic religion. 
or the apologist of the Catholic faith, believing, as I alvvay» 
have, in the religious doctrines of my ancestors. I. at an 
early day, imbibed a prejudice against the tenets of tho 
Catholic church, and these early impressions have never 



i)cen removed. I dissent from its doctrines, discard its 
heresies, and denounce its persecution* 

■• l ai i a Protest. mt because I believe its teachings to be 
the teachings of the Bible, and its religion the religion of 
our Savior, lint while I am strong in my own faith, 1 
scorn to proscribe others who differ from me in religious 
sentiment. Idonoteeek to dive down into the hearts of 
men to ferret out their religious dogmas, but would Becure 
toeveryd i aination their constitutional ' right to wor- 
ship God according to the dictates of their own con 
science.' " 

For this I was denounced at home aa b< ing 
favorable to Catholicism, and many votes were 
cast against me on accounl of a deluded 
(hat 1 favored their religious dogmas. Vet, now 

it is said upon this floor, by hi ntlemen 

who are acknowledged leaders of the 
American party, that any other doctrine than 
this, which I asserted during the last Cot 
and for which I was furiously denounced by 
that party in Tennessee, is not only subversive 



of the Constitution] but is monstrous. It is for 

this reason that I have read it, because ■ very man 
In my district and in my Stale will see at once 
that the point made against me has now not only 
been abandoned, but denounced, by some of the 
leaders of that party on this floor; and yet 
complain of us for objecting to that feature of 
their national platform which the "sober second 
thought" of the people has compelled them to 
abandon. With all due deference to those gen- 
tlemen, 1 think it is time now that they should 
agree upon some common ground, and let us 
know what it is, so that the country may not b« 
longer misled. 

.Now. I must return my most grateful thanks 
to the House for the privilege they have ac- 
corded me in order to make this explanation, and 
for the attention with which they have listened to 
the remarks I have had the honor to submit. 



\ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011 897 875 4 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011 897 875 4 



